BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
                              Senator Wieckowski, Chair
                                2015 - 2016  Regular 
           
          Bill No:           AB 1059
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Author:    |Eduardo Garcia                                       |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |-----------+-----------------------+-------------+----------------|
          |Version:   |2/26/2015              |Hearing      |6/17/2015       |
          |           |                       |Date:        |                |
          |-----------+-----------------------+-------------+----------------|
          |Urgency:   |No                     |Fiscal:      |Yes             |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Consultant:|Laurie Harris                                        |
          |           |                                                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          
          SUBJECT:  California Communities Environmental Health Screening

            ANALYSIS:
          
          Existing law:  
          
          1) Under the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,  
             requires the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to  
             determine the 1990 statewide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions  
             level, to approve a statewide GHG emissions limit equivalent  
             to that level that will be achieved by 2020, and to adopt GHG  
             emissions reductions measures by regulation.  ARB is  
             authorized to include the use of market-based mechanisms to  
             comply with the regulations.  (Health and Safety Code (HSC)  
             §38500 et seq.)

          2) Establishes the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) as a  
             special fund in the State Treasury; requires that all moneys,  
             except for fines and penalties, collected pursuant to a  
             market-based mechanism be deposited in the fund; and requires  
             the Department of Finance, in consultation with the state  
             board and any other relevant state agency, to develop, as  
             specified, a three-year investment plan for the moneys  
             deposited in the GGRF.  (Government Code §16428.8)

          3) Under the GGRF Investment Plan and Communities Revitalization  
             Act, for investment opportunities related to the GGRF  
             investment plan, requires the California Environmental  
             Protection Agency (CalEPA) to identify disadvantaged  
             communities based on geographic, socioeconomic, public  







          AB 1059 (Eduardo Garcia)                                Page 2  
          of ?
          
          
             health, and environmental hazard criteria, including areas  
             disproportionately affected by environmental pollution.  (HSC  
             §39713)

          4) Requires the GGRF investment plan to allocate a minimum of  
             25% of the funds to projects that benefit disadvantaged  
             communities and to allocate 10% of the funds to projects  
             located within disadvantaged communities.  (HSC §39713)

          5) Requires the ARB, in consultation with CalEPA, to develop  
             funding guidelines for administering agencies receiving  
             allocations of GGRF funds that includes a component for how  
             agencies should maximize benefits to disadvantaged  
             communities.  (HSC §39715)

          This bill: 

          1) Requires the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment  
             (OEHHA) to update the California Communities Environmental  
             Health Screening (CalEnviroScreen) tool by using any relevant  
             environmental data relating to known impacts on the  
             environmental quality in communities at the California-Mexico  
             border region, including, but not limited to, air pollution,  
             water pollution, and toxic sites.

          2) Requires OEHHA to report to the Legislature on any barriers  
             to accessing data for updating the tool by its next update or  
             by January 1, 2017, whichever is earlier.

            Background
          
           1)  The CalEnviroScreen Tool and Disadvantaged Communities.

             CalEnviroScreen was developed by OEHHA, at the request of  
             CalEPA, to determine a list of disadvantaged communities in  
             California that are the most vulnerable and  
             pollution-burdened.  The tool will be used to help direct  
             those GGRF investments targeted for disadvantaged  
             communities, as well as to guide CalEPA in administering its  
             Environmental Justice Small Grants Program and prioritizing  
             resources for cleanup and abatement projects and outreach  
             efforts by the Agency. 

             CalEnviroScreen 2.0 is the most recent version, adopted in  








          AB 1059 (Eduardo Garcia)                                Page 3  
          of ?
          
          
             August 2014, after  previous drafts underwent public review  
             with input from boards and departments that would be using  
             the tool.  According to CalEPA, the current version  
             incorporates 19 indicators, including the addition of  
             indicators for drinking water and unemployment rate, enhances  
             the geographic scale by using approximately 8,000 census  
             tracts instead of zip codes, and has incorporated the most  
             up-to-date information.  Indicators include those for  
             exposures, such as ozone concentrations, particulate matter  
             [PM] 2.5 concentrations, drinking water contaminants, and  
             toxic releases from facilities, as well as for environmental  
             effects, such as groundwater threats, hazardous waste, and  
             impaired water bodies.  Indicators for sensitive populations  
             and socioeconomic factors are also incorporated.

           2)  CalEnviroScreen Updates for the California-Mexico Border.

             According to the "Summary of Major Changes in CalEnviroScreen  
             2.0" update document, in October 2014 CalEnviroScreen 2.0 was  
             updated to account for gaps in environmental data along the  
             U.S.-Mexico border, including the incorporation of  
             information on:
                a)      Diesel particulate matter emissions, to account  
                  for emissions from idling trucks waiting to cross from  
                  Mexico into the U.S., specifically for the Otay and  
                  Calexico East border crossings, and 
                b)      Traffic density for a portion of the roads in  
                  Mexico in close proximity to California (within a 150m  
                  buffer, as was previously applied to other census tracts  
                  within the state).  
             These changes were made in response to public workshops and  
             comment periods following the release of the August 2014  
             CalEnviroScreen draft.

             The "Responses to Public Comments on the Method to Identify  
             Disadvantaged Communities Under Senate Bill 535" document was  
             also released in October 2014.  In this report, one of the  
             major comments to which OEHHA and CalEPA responded was to  
             "address gaps in the data used by CalEnviroScreen 2.0 to  
             evaluate how pollution originating in Mexico contributes to  
             pollution burden in census tracts along the California-Mexico  
             border."

             Though the aforementioned updates to diesel PM and traffic  








          AB 1059 (Eduardo Garcia)                                Page 4  
          of ?
          
          
             density at the border were incorporated, the ARB reported  
             that, for ozone and PM2.5 air monitoring measurements from  
             stations in Mexico, the data are not currently complete or of  
             sufficient quality to be incorporated into the  
             CalEnviroScreen.  However, the United States Environmental  
             Protection Agency (US EPA) is placing two new PM2.5 monitors  
             at the border, including one at Calexico, with completion  
             estimated to be Spring 2017, at which time ARB can evaluate  
             the data.

             For traffic density, OEHHA reports that the office  
             "recognizes that there are other major roadways within 150  
             meters of the U.S.-Mexico border.  Resources permitting,  
             OEHHA will work with the California Department of Public  
             Health (the source of data for CalEnviroScreen's traffic  
             density indicator) to look into whether additional traffic  
             information is available and of sufficient quality to use in  
             future versions of CalEnviroScreen."

             For toxic releases and hazardous waste from Mexican  
             facilities in close proximity to the border, OEHHA states  
             that "resources permitting, OEHHA could consult with US EPA  
             and the Department of Toxic Substances Control to determine  
             the feasibility of incorporating Mexican data into  
             CalEnviroScreen indicators."

           1) California-Mexico Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to  
             Enhance Cooperation on Climate Change and the Environment.

             In July of 2014, California and Mexico signed an MOU to  
             improve and protect the environment as part of a four-year  
             effort.  The MOU calls for the development of a Joint Action  
             Plan with four priority action areas, including climate  
             change, air quality, wildfires, and clean vehicles.  The  
             goals of this MOU are to share knowledge, information, and  
             experience, as well as coordinate planning efforts for air  
             quality along the border and improve air quality data  
             comparability between the two countries.

           2) Health and Environmental Quality in Imperial County and the  
             California-Mexico Border Region.

             According to the California Department of Public Health, as  
             of 2012, children in Imperial County were hospitalized for  








          AB 1059 (Eduardo Garcia)                                Page 5  
          of ?
          
          
             asthma at a rate that was three times higher than the state  
             average.

             Per the US EPA Green Book list of nonattainment counties for  
             all criteria pollutants, as of January 2015, portions of  
             Imperial County were classified as serious for PM-10 and  
             moderate for PM-2.5.  PM-2.5, referring to the fine particle  
             size of 2.5 micrometers in diameter, along with ozone, cause  
             significant adverse health effects, including heart and lung  
             disease, and are measured by a network of ARB air monitoring  
             stations across the state, though not all cities have  
             stations.

             The New River, which flows north from Mexico, through  
             Calexico, to the Salton Sea, is one of the most polluted  
             rivers in the country, due to discharges from urban,  
             agricultural, and industrial sources in both Mexico and the  
             U.S.  In response to concerns about the lack of data factored  
             in to CalEnviroScreen regarding polluted waterways that cross  
             the border, OEHHA responds, "Locations along the US-Mexico  
             border present a special challenge, particularly with respect  
             to sources of impact that originate outside of California for  
             which there are not reliable and comparable quantitative  
             measures.  Some contributions are included in  
             CalEnviroScreen, such as 
             rivers designated by U.S. government entities as impaired  
             that flow into the U.S. from Mexico."
            
          


            Comments
          
          1) Purpose of Bill.  

             According to the author, "Border communities along the  
             California-Mexico border are severely impacted by idled  
             vehicles and trucks at the border.  According to data from  
             the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), on average  
             approximately 2,400 trucks cross per day in Otay, 832 in  
             Calexico East, 151 in Tecate, and less than one in Andrade.   
             In my 56th Assembly District, specifically in Imperial County  
             whose economy is primarily driven by agriculture, idling  
             vehicles and trucks moving goods across the border combined  








          AB 1059 (Eduardo Garcia)                                Page 6  
          of ?
          
          
             with agricultural related air quality impacts places  
             significant environmental stress on the community.  This  
             places the health and safety of the public living along the  
             border at risk.  Having accurate air quality measuring tools  
             is essential to better understand the severity of the issue  
             and formulate action plans, as well as to help the same  
             communities better compete for AB 32 funding."

          2) Use of CalEnviroScreen.

             As noted by OEHHA Director George Alexeeff, "Rather than  
             looking at individual types of pollution in isolation,  
             CalEnviroScreen helps policymakers and scientists examine  
             multiple pollutants and factors at once."  Thus, the goal of  
             the tool is to look at a number of indicators concurrently,  
             in order to have a comprehensive understanding of those areas  
             throughout the state that are most vulnerable to impacts from  
             environmental pollution.

             With this in mind, it is important to update all relevant  
             indicators, including socioeconomic and sensitive population  
             indicators, so that the tool remains as comprehensive as  
             possible.  Furthermore, indicators should be regularly  
             updated throughout the state, as new information is  
             available, and OEHHA has acknowledged that they are aware of  
             a number of potential data gaps in various regions.

          3) Statutory Guidance on Border Updates.

             Per the latest update to CalEnviroScreen, the areas within  
             which the majority of disadvantaged communities were  
             identified included the San Joaquin Valley, parts of Los  
             Angeles and the Inland Empire, and large portions of the  
             Coachella and Imperial Valleys and Mojave Desert, in addition  
             to communities located near industrial areas and major  
             roadways.

             Given OEHHA's recognition of data deficiencies at the border,  
             the need to balance data analysis with availability of agency  
             resources, and the high numbers of disadvantaged communities  
             in this area of the state, perhaps the statutory direction in  
             AB 1059 would provide guidance in further updating this  
             portion of the tool.









          AB 1059 (Eduardo Garcia)                                Page 7  
          of ?
          
          
             It should be noted that data gaps exist in some areas across  
             the state, not only the border region, and OEHHA works to  
             fill those gaps and keep the tool current.  Given its  
             international border, the region in this bill is somewhat  
             unique.  While a report on data gaps for this specific region  
             will provide additional clarity for interested groups, it may  
             also set a precedent of regionally-focused reporting  
             requirements which can slow down the update process for the  
             tool.

          4) Broad Goals need to be Clarified.

             The current language in the bill is very broad, requesting  
             updates to air and water pollution and toxic sites from any  
             relevant data.  Per OEHHA and CalEPA's comments as of the  
             October 2014 update, it seems that all data of sufficient  
             quality available to-date has been included, and deficiencies  
             in air quality and toxic site data have been acknowledged.  

             Additionally, agencies are conducting studies to evaluate air  
             quality in communities in the southern part of San Diego  
             County (conducted by the University of Washington in  
             2015-2017), in the southern parts of Imperial County,  
             including the Calexico border (University of Washington and  
             the California Environmental Health Tracking Program), and  
             near the San Ysidro border crossing for fine particles (US  
             EPA and San Diego Air Pollution Control District). 

             Given that OEHHA and CalEPA are aware of the deficiencies in  
             data and work is being conducted currently that would inform  
             future CalEnviroScreen updates, in addition to the fact that  
             CalEnviroScreen already incorporates the broad categories of  
             air and water pollution and toxic sites in their indicators,  
             the following proposed amendments are needed to provide  
             clarity and focus in obtaining the necessary data for  
             incorporation into the tool: 

             a)    In order to list the provisions of the bill in  
                chronological order to improve flow, the reporting  
                requirement of the bill (subdivision (c), lines 20-25)  
                should be moved to precede the update to the tool in  
                subdivision (b). 

             b)    In order to provide clarity about what data needs to be  








          AB 1059 (Eduardo Garcia)                                Page 8  
          of ?
          
          
                updated, strike "any relevant environmental data" and add  
                language to specify deficiencies, barriers to access, and  
                current and future studies and plans to obtain data  
                regarding air quality, water quality, and toxic sites  
                necessary for updating the tool.
           
             c)    In order to provide additional focus on what data is  
                necessary, add language that the reporting requirement may  
                include, but not be limited to, those gaps noted  
                previously by OEHHA, including air quality measurements  
                for ozone and PM2.5, vehicle emissions at border  
                crossings, complete traffic density data within 150 meters  
                of the border, water quality data for waterways that cross  
                the border, and the feasibility of incorporating Pollutant  
                Release and Transfer Registry information from Mexico into  
                the tool.

             d)    In order to allow OEHHA and CalEPA to most efficiently  
                update and utilize the tool, the update requirement  
                (subdivision (b), lines 15-19) should be modified to note  
                that, once the relevant data is identified, as specified,  
                the office shall include the data in the next update of  
                the tool.

            Related/Prior Legislation

          SB 535 (De Leon), Chapter 830, Statutes of 2012, required the  
          GGRF investment plan to allocate 25% of the funds to projects  
          that benefit disadvantaged communities and 10% to projects  
          located within those communities.

          AB 1079 (V. Perez, Statutes of 2009, Chapter 382), required the  
          California-Mexico Border Relations Council to create a strategic  
          plan to study, monitor, remediate and enhance the water quality  
          of the New River in Imperial County to protect human health and  
          develop a river parkway suitable for public use and enjoyment.
           
          SOURCE:                    Comité Cívico del Valle  

           SUPPORT:               
          Desert Protective Society
          Eastside (LA) Coalition Against Exide
          Imperial County Air Pollution Control District
          Labelgmos.org








          AB 1059 (Eduardo Garcia)                                Page 9  
          of ?
          
          
          La Union Hace la Fuerza
          Our Roots Multi-Cultural Center
          Seeley Citizens United
          The Environmental Justice Coalition for Water
          The Family Treehouse
          Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment (CAREs)
          Valley Improvement Projects (VIP)  

           OPPOSITION:    None received   
           
           ARGUMENTS IN  
          SUPPORT:    

          According to a coalition of organizations in support, "There is  
          currently an absence of empirical evidence that tells the story  
          of the California-Mexico border.  OEHHA and California Air  
          Resources Board (ARB) have acknowledged the deficiency and have  
          recommended further study.  Given the characteristics of the  
          border, both natural and man-made, there are several variables  
          to consider.  Many vehicles sit idle while waiting for both  
          Customs and Immigration inspections.  This process of thorough  
          inspection requires time which results in increased carbon  
          emissions, negative health impacts and could potentially limit  
          economic feasibility." 
           
           
           
                                          
                                      -- END --